previously excluded groups, voices and knowledge unobtainable in any
other way” (Lundy & McGovern, 2006,p. 58). Such local connections were
imperative in an environment of mistrust that is fueled by the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict. Collaborative research practices therefore not only
address issues of fear and safety, but they can also be decisive for gaining
access and building trust.
Lastly, many researchers discover Action Research as a result of work-
ingwith indigenous and marginalized people. Such projects inevitably bring
up the question, “What really is the purpose of social research?” (Brydon-
Milleret al., 2003, p. 13). The trademark of such collaborative projects is
that they will ultimately not only contribute to the academic enterprise, but
they may also be used to support local capacity-building; provide a
“history from below”; and challenge undemocratic and oppressive social
conditions. Therefore:
It is precisely because action research is designed to validate and disseminate popular,
community-based knowledge to challenge social marginalization and structures of
oppression that it is particularly relevant in societies that have been shattered by armed
conflict and are engaging in a process of post-conflict transformation. (Lundy &
McGovern,2006, p. 56)In conflict and post-conflict zones, careful consideration concerning the
ethics of research and its potential impact on local communities are
therefore all the more imperative. Instead of engaging in “drive-in” and
“fly-in” research practices that may have few or no benefits (and in some
cases, could potentially be harmful) to community members, more socially
engaged research can have various functions for local stakeholders, includ-
ing: documenting, recognizing, and raising awareness of previously margin-
alized issues; empowering communities by focusing on issues that are
of local concern; and producing scientific studies that may benefit these
communities.
GOING NATIVE
Once we attempt to understand a community, and engage with a people,
do we inevitably become part of it? Arguably doing research in conflict
zones makes social scientific categories of “researchers” versus “the
researched,” and “observers” as opposed to “participants,” ever more
fuzzy. Traditional scientific methods stipulate that social scientists are to
be disembodied, disinterested, and uninvolved, merely following sound
32 CHRISTINE LEUENBERGER